[Shaun]

Earlier this week, Gordon Brown discussed plans to introduce "compulsory organ donation", where citizens of the United Kingdom could decide to "opt out" of donating their organs, instead of deciding to opt in.

What are your opinions regarding this? Should we be assumed into giving away our organs post mortem? Or is it a good thing?

[Legend]

Wierd you asked this because I sent off for my provisional license today and on it they asked if you'd go on the organ donor register or not. I ticked yes straight away because it's something I've said I'd always do ... once I'm dead, they are no use to me so I see no reason not to. If others are going to benefit then why not ...

I think it should be compulsary, if it's potentially saving people's lives then what's the harm or the big deal in it? You don't need them, you're dead ... don't be selfish.

[Shaun]

I personally am torn in the issue. Whilst I don't want to be selfish, and I'd of course appear so if I were in the position where I needed a heart transplant, the thought of my body being cut up for spare parts is a little gruesome. That said, the "opt out" system is much better than the current one, as people would be more motivated and compelled to opt out of it if they disagreed with it, which I, unfortunately, would do.

I saw someone on a BBC Have Your Say, who said "those who decide to opt out should automatically be put on a parallel list disallowing them the right to other peoples' organs should they require them". This, I disagree with. There's a difference between needing an organ, and choosing to donate. Whilst I respect those who decide to donate, I shouldn't be criticised for choosing not to. It's my body.

[Shaun]

Note to self - how can I be drunk and type perfectly? How bizarre.

[Legend]

Originally posted by Shaun
I personally am torn in the issue. Whilst I don't want to be selfish, and I'd of course appear so if I were in the position where I needed a heart transplant, the thought of my body being cut up for spare parts is a little gruesome. That said, the "opt out" system is much better than the current one, as people would be more motivated and compelled to opt out of it if they disagreed with it, which I, unfortunately, would do.

I saw someone on a BBC Have Your Say, who said "those who decide to opt out should automatically be put on a parallel list disallowing them the right to other peoples' organs should they require them". This, I disagree with. There's a difference between needing an organ, and choosing to donate. Whilst I respect those who decide to donate, I shouldn't be criticised for choosing not to. It's my body.

I actually agree with that about those who opt out should be disallowed. Happy getting the benefits of other people's organs but not interested in helping others?

It would be completely different if they were asking for one of your kidney's when you are alive but when you are dead, they are no use to you and yet they can potentially save somebody else's life. However "gruesome" it may seem to have your body cut open and ripped apart, organ by organ wouldn't the fact that you may save somebody's life make up for it? You're hardly getting a ring side seat of it from heaven are you.

Originally posted by Shaun
Note to self - how can I be drunk and type perfectly? How bizarre.

It's probably because you are sitting down. I only get spinny room when standing up.

[Shaun]

Lol, no tearing organ from organ talk whilst drunk lmao.

That is a fair point, and I'd certainly never rule out donation completely. I think it's probably something that I'd do once I'm more mature.

[bananarama]

I am torn on this issue also. My worry is hospitals desperate for a doner may not show the same degree of care when deciding if a potential doners life can be saved or not.

In principle I think it is wrong to carve up a body without direct permission beforehand.

Before going down this opt out road I think they should try more at direct appeals for doners and on a regular basis on our TV screns and radio.....

Also I think potential doners should be given financial incentives to donate such as funeral expenses being paid by the state for the family of a doner.

Hospitals have to purchase drugs and technology so why should they not have to purchase donated organs......

[Legend]

Originally posted by bananarama
Hospitals have to purchase drugs and technology so why should they not have to purchase donated organs......

For exactly that reason, they are being donated and not sold. It boils down to potentially saving somebody's life, not making some money to go towards a funeral.

And you said "Hospitals have to purchase drugs etc, but organ donors don't do it to help out the hospital, they do it to help out other people.

My worry is hospitals desperate for a doner may not show the same degree of care when deciding if a potential doners life can be saved or not.

But they wouldn't gain from that. Either way, somebody is going to die and I'm sure it wouldn't cross their mind to not treat them as well as they could ... it's immoral for a start and if somebody (donor or not) is dying then doctors have a duty to do all they can.

[Tom]

I think the opt out system is better than the opt in system because some people will wanting to sign up to be an organ doner but will not know how to go about it.

I think its a bit selfish when people don't need their organs anymore but won't give them away, but I am a bit hypocritical because when I'm dead I don't want to be gutted like a fish or treated as a peice of meat.

I also disagree with the rule that people who don't want to be a donor cannot receive a transplant. Where their right to life shouldn't be removed, its putting them under too much pressure and they just may not want to do it. A better reward system would be for the government to pay for the funerals of those who have donated.

[Conor]

Well what about this system.

Feel free to opt out, but if you ever need an organ from another person you wont get it. Fair enough?

btw, its not real, but its just a suggestion I thought up of lol

[Tom]

Thats what someone else said, and I don't think thats fair. Its pressuring people into donating their organs whether they want to or not.

[Conor]

Originally posted by Tom_
Thats what someone else said, and I don't think thats fair. Its pressuring people into donating their organs whether they want to or not.

Yeah, but its also not fair on aperson that will die because of the other persons selfishness.

[Tom]

I agree, but people who are on the transplant list probably won't want to limit their chances of survival even further. I don't think people should be denied the right to life because of the pressure the government put on us. They take so much off us whilst we are alive, we should have the choice of what happens afterwards.

I think it is a bit selfish when people have perfectly good organs which they take to their grave, but like I say I don't exactly want to be gutted out or treated like a piece of meat. But having said that, I'm in no rush to opt in to organ donation but if the opt out procedure does come in, I won't be opting out either.

[Shaun]

I don't think it's the state's position to presume people will want to donate their organs, should they choose not to opt out for whatever reason. I'm not usually one to be all libertarian, but I have to in this case.

[Magic]

I would say yes, but I think, No is the right answer.

I think that it is unfair to just assume you want your Organs donated, as some people wont have the oppurtunity to Opt out, meaning they will practically be 'forced' in to having organ donations. Although it will save lifes, it could destroy people freedom of choice in life.

[cathaz]

Sorry guys but i would defo opt out i dont want to be chopped up even when im dead i believe in life after death though so want every chance i can get lol, i guess it all depends on your views on other things linked really

[Tom]

If you believe in life after death you will know that you only borrow your body for this life time, and you get a new one in your next life time whatever that may be. Going into a whole different subjects its not your body that is reincarnated, therefore you don't need it anymore.

[Oxy]

Ill be taking my name off the list straight away

[Spike]

I would opt out, people need organs but I don't want them to have my organs.

[Magic]

I would Opt in though.

I just realised - Its COD

[Sunny_01]

The thing is this body belongs to me in both life and death! No one has the right to take away my right to choose about what happens once I die. I dont like that our choice is being removed and that we have to now take steps to stop them harvesting our organs if we dont want to donate when previously we needed to do nothing.

I am not against organ donation but I am all for choice and Gordon Brown is making it feel that people have to choose NOT to do something thus portraying them as bad people.

I dont belong to anyone so why does anyone feel they have the right to decide what happens to my body?

Now I know it sounds like I am against donation, well I am not, in fact I have been a voluntary registered donor for many years, I would happily let it remain so if the choice remained mine!

[Jackie]

I think it shouldn't be compulsory i think we should have the right to choose.
My daughter died 3 years ago in a road accident she was only 15,i was in complete shock as you can imagine.No one asked me about organ donation not even the coroneer,i was numb with pain and grief when the coroner phoned me up telling me the results of the postmotem he didn't mention anything to me about organ donation.
But as years passed i wish her organs were donated because they could of saved another life.

[serensilver]

i think when you die if you haven't signed to say you definately dont want to donate your organs then doctors should be allowed to use them!

it is obviously a very hard subject for the relatives do they dont they donate their loved ones organs but they are going to people who's lives could be saved, which is a good thing.

[Scarlett.]

I agree with it, once your dead you are not gonna need your organs, so why not save someone elses life?

[bananarama]

Originally posted by Legend

For exactly that reason, they are being donated and not sold. It boils down to potentially saving somebody's life, not making some money to go towards a funeral.

And you said "Hospitals have to purchase drugs etc, but organ donors don't do it to help out the hospital, they do it to help out other people.

But they wouldn't gain from that. Either way, somebody is going to die and I'm sure it wouldn't cross their mind to not treat them as well as they could ... it's immoral for a start and if somebody (donor or not) is dying then doctors have a duty to do all they can.

Your first reply you are missing my point. Organs should not repeat should not be regarded as a free donation. (That is the reason for a shortage. NHS wanting freebies) Instead they should be regarded as a medical item to be aquired with a cost as in any material needed by the hospitals.


In reply to your second point regarding doctors duties to save life. You have more faith in human nature than I do.
Two lives would be at stake. The potential doner and the recipient. Both hanging on to life. a massive conflict of interest. There would be no guarantee a just decision was made.......